6 reasons why god exist...

[Jaimecbr900]

As a sort of non believer, I would love to see proof that there is or is not a God. I think it would be awesome for everyone to know, matter-of-fact whether or not a higher power really exists. And I know that this probably wasn't directed in my general direction, but my cuts on religion are only in jest. I won't ridicule someone for their beliefs. Later, QD.

You don't chastise anyone on their beliefs. Viagra boy does.

I'm not sure, but I will take a stab at it.

I think that part of the reason why God doesn't simply just part the heavens and says "howdy do" may be because if you did not come to the decision that he existed on your own then how would it be fair that you reap all the same rewards as someone who didn't need that revelation to believe. Follow?

Look at it like this: Would you prefer to have a friend that is a friend by choice or a friend that someone PAYS to be your "friend"? Same idea I think. Kinda like when you have to remind someone that today is your birthday. How's their sudden, "oops, Happy Birthday." compare to someone who sought you out to TELL you "happy birthday"? Kinda makes a difference, doesn't it?

[quickdodge®]

I think that part of the reason why God doesn't simply just part the heavens and says "howdy do" may be because if you did not come to the decision that he existed on your own then how would it be fair that you reap all the same rewards as someone who didn't need that revelation to believe. Follow?

Look at it like this: Would you prefer to have a friend that is a friend by choice or a friend that someone PAYS to be your "friend"? Same idea I think. Kinda like when you have to remind someone that today is your birthday. How's their sudden, "oops, Happy Birthday." compare to someone who sought you out to TELL you "happy birthday"? Kinda makes a difference, doesn't it?

I got that 100% before your analogy. Remember now, I'm smart. Lolol. I've never heard it put that way. The more I think of your answer, the more it makes sense. But what about the people that do have faith? He should show/reveal himself to them to let them know that their faith is not misplaced or in vain. Later, QD.

[Jaimecbr900]

I got that 100% before your analogy. Remember now, I'm smart. Lolol.

I'm bad about over documenting my posts......

I've never heard it put that way. The more I think of your answer, the more it makes sense. But what about the people that do have faith? He should show/reveal himself to them to let them know that their faith is not misplaced or in vain. Later, QD.

Well, I guess it's the same reason that he doesn't just "appear" to anyone. I believe w/o him appearing before me, so I don't need him to materialize to continue to believe. Sort of the same way we do "good" things w/o anyone asking us to. We just do them. We get some kind of feeling or thought and just act upon that accordingly. Similar thing to believing in God. You read, you go to church, you listen to your parents/family, you ask questions, you do research, and you use logic. Eventually you will find an answer that tilts the scales enough for you to choose one side of the fence over the other. Sometimes it hits you like a bolt of lightning, while others may be more subdued. It's a very individualistic thing. Some very brilliant and very nice people are self-proclaimed Atheists, and that is totally their perrogative. I feel everyone HAS to make that choice on their own. Eventually, everyone does. Not everyone will agree with you on it, but you will have to eventually make a decision one way or another. Some get there quicker than others, but it doesn't matter as long as you have time......alas there's the rub....

[TheChosenOne]

Atheist!!!


Riddle me this...

(keep in mind, i'm just throwing this one up in the air, and i'm really looking for an answer)

If Adam and Eve were the only two people in the world whom were created by the almighty GOD himself, then how did they procreate? Im not looking for a explaination on how they did it physically, but weren't they technically kin. I mean, God created Adam and then he created Eve form Adam's rib...

A more important question is would it be considered incest if they had offspring??? If not in the case of Adam and Eve, what about their children??? it says in the bible that EVERYONE is a decendent of Adam and Eve, so somewhere along the line someone must have had sex with thier sister, right???

Just a little question for the believers................

[Jaimecbr900]

Atheist!!!


Riddle me this...

(keep in mind, i'm just throwing this one up in the air, and i'm really looking for an answer)

If Adam and Eve were the only two people in the world whom were created by the almighty GOD himself, then how did they procreate? Im not looking for a explaination on how they did it physically, but weren't they technically kin. I mean, God created Adam and then he created Eve form Adam's rib...

A more important question is would it be considered incest if they had offspring??? If not in the case of Adam and Eve, what about their children??? it says in the bible that EVERYONE is a decendent of Adam and Eve, so somewhere along the line someone must have had sex with thier sister, right???

Just a little question for the believers................

Are you asking how it's possible or are you questioning it's morality?

[quickdodge®]

Are you asking how it's possible or are you questioning it's morality?

I believe the morality. Later, QD.

[_Christian_]

Atheist!!!


Riddle me this...

(keep in mind, i'm just throwing this one up in the air, and i'm really looking for an answer)

If Adam and Eve were the only two people in the world whom were created by the almighty GOD himself, then how did they procreate? Im not looking for a explaination on how they did it physically, but weren't they technically kin. I mean, God created Adam and then he created Eve form Adam's rib...

A more important question is would it be considered incest if they had offspring??? If not in the case of Adam and Eve, what about their children??? it says in the bible that EVERYONE is a decendent of Adam and Eve, so somewhere along the line someone must have had sex with thier sister, right???

Just a little question for the believers................

Eve got freaky with cane and able:idb:...that is if youbelieve the bible

[sdiddy]

A more important question is would it be considered incest if they had offspring??? If not in the case of Adam and Eve, what about their children??? it says in the bible that EVERYONE is a decendent of Adam and Eve, so somewhere along the line someone must have had sex with thier sister, right???

yes.

There was no law against incest in early times. After all, what other choice did they have?

[jskylinesx]

Atheist!!!


Riddle me this...

(keep in mind, i'm just throwing this one up in the air, and i'm really looking for an answer)

If Adam and Eve were the only two people in the world whom were created by the almighty GOD himself, then how did they procreate? Im not looking for a explaination on how they did it physically, but weren't they technically kin. I mean, God created Adam and then he created Eve form Adam's rib...

A more important question is would it be considered incest if they had offspring??? If not in the case of Adam and Eve, what about their children??? it says in the bible that EVERYONE is a decendent of Adam and Eve, so somewhere along the line someone must have had sex with thier sister, right???

Just a little question for the believers................

Whether or not you may believe in evolution, God or any form of higher power, or nothing at all... everything came from somewhere, right? Whether or not you believe it was God who created us through Adam and Eve, we all came from the same origin. So Adam and Eve were brother and sister, and they had children, their children then had children, and so on. Even if you believe in evolution, there had to have been the first few people who were created. Just for those who oppose this argument, lets say 1 million people were created. Well, they still had to be created from the same place or matter to just "appear" out of their previous non-existence. Whether you believe it was Adam and Eve who created us or people just started popping up out of nowhere from little pieces of matter starting to evolve... if you think about it, everytime you have sex you are sleeping with a very distant relative. And we can still create children and mass produce with these distant relatives. Why couldn't they do it back then in the beginning of it all? Call it incest, call it what you will. Two completely different people didn't form from two completely different places and just evolve, so if you believe in evolution or you are an atheist (whatever it is that you believe in your opposition to God), everytime you have sex you are fucking your very distant sister.

[Total_Blender]

so if you believe in evolution or you are an atheist (whatever it is that you believe in your opposition to God), everytime you have sex you are fucking your very distant sister.

Inbreeding is actually a part of the speciation process. A population of a certain type of animal becomes isolated from the rest, and the gene pool narrows, evolution is speeded up because inbreeding allows mutations and such. Crazy bit its true.

Think about it... monkeys get down out of the trees, and start moving on the ground. The monkeys that are coming down out of the trees form a big monkey import club and bring their hoochie-mama monkeys with them. Now out of these monkeys, the ones who can walk on 2 legs can cover the most ground and win races. They start having secret gtg's far away from the trees to get away from the ricer monkeys who aren't fast and just get in the way.

Now these monkeys don't want to go back into the trees because they have so much fun racing on the ground. The hook up with their hoochies and raise their monkey kids on the ground. They learn to eat meat instead of banannas.... Etc etc

[C22H19N3O4]

You don't chastise anyone on their beliefs. Viagra boy does.

I'm only critical of your religious posts b/c they are comical. If you don't like what I post then don't read it. I encourage everyone to respond to my topics, EVEN someone like you. If you can dish it out then you SHOULD be able to take it.

You have yet to answer a question I posed to you last year. It's not verbatim but close enough: if you and every Christian zealot deem science as inaccurate, why do you reap the rewards of it everyday? I know it's an elementary question, but it serves my purpose. I'm willing to bet that if a family member were to become ill you wouldn't call your priest first. Im pretty sure you'd be headed to the ER. Why not just pray about it? Pray and hope that your loved one will pull through and forget about all the advances in medicine. Oddly enough, religious nuts only seem to call the clergy when the patient is near death's door. People like you take comfort in the bosom of science when you need it most, but when it doesn't conform to your propaganda it's the red headed stepchild. Now, the statement is not just meant for Jaime, but for every Christian nut that assumes science is inherently evil.

The only difference is that evolution can be disproven rather easily - but that does not mean that you cannot believe it on faith, which is completely fine.

WOW! You can really disprove evolution through probability/statistics? I'll alert the media, because this is breaking news. Creation scientists will not even make that claim. So your decades in evolutionary biology helped you come to this conclusion? We should just dismiss the last 150 years of research, b/c you know that irreducible complexity lends itself to the fact that evolution is SOOO complex that the probability of evolution having occurred is almost zero? Absolutely amazing! Where did you do your research? I hope you're not of one those guys that reads creationist websites and pretends to know something about science. Im pretty sure you've taken basic science courses and understand common biological terminology?

Now, you mentioned Darwin's Black Box. Michael Behe wrote this book about 10 years ago, he's Roman Catholic, and has NEVER had a peer reviewed article published. So he is not biased at all and claims his ideology does not force him to believe in a Designer? He's been ripped apart for the last 10 years since his book was pusblished. Remember the Dover trial in 2005? Read about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmil...chool_District


Just some comments by the judge on Behe's testimony:
The judge in his final ruling relied heavily upon Behe's testimony for the defense, citing:

-"Consider, to illustrate, that Professor Behe remarkably and unmistakably claims that the plausibility of the argument for ID depends upon the extent to which one believes in the existence of God.
-'As no evidence in the record indicates that any other scientific proposition's validity rests on belief in God, nor is the Court aware of any such scientific propositions, Professor Behe's assertion constitutes substantial evidence that in his view, as is commensurate with other prominent ID leaders, ID is a religious and not a scientific proposition.
-"First, defense expert Professor Fuller agreed that ID aspires to "change the ground rules" of science and lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also embrace astrology. Moreover, defense expert Professor Minnich acknowledged that for ID to be considered science, the ground rules of science have to be broadened to allow consideration of supernatural forces.
-"What is more, defense experts concede that ID is not a theory as that term is defined by the NAS and admit that ID is at best "fringe science" which has achieved no acceptance in the scientific community.
-"We therefore find that Professor Behe's claim for irreducible complexity has been refuted in peer-reviewed research papers and has been rejected by the scientific community at large.
-"ID proponents primarily argue for design through negative arguments against evolution, as illustrated by Professor Behe’s argument that “irreducibly complex” systems cannot be produced through Darwinian, or any natural, mechanisms. However, … arguments against evolution are not arguments for design. Expert testimony revealed that just because scientists cannot explain today how biological systems evolved does not mean that they cannot, and will not, be able to explain them tomorrow. As Dr. Padian aptly noted, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”… Irreducible complexity is a negative argument against evolution, not proof of design, a point conceded by defense expert Professor Minnich.
-"Professor Behe’s concept of irreducible complexity depends on ignoring ways in which evolution is known to occur. Although Professor Behe is adamant in his definition of irreducible complexity when he says a precursor “missing a part is by definition nonfunctional,” what he obviously means is that it will not function in the same way the system functions when all the parts are present. For example in the case of the bacterial flagellum, removal of a part may prevent it from acting as a rotary motor. However, Professor Behe excludes, by definition, the possibility that a precursor to the bacterial flagellum functioned not as a rotary motor, but in some other way, for example as a secretory system.
-"Professor Behe has applied the concept of irreducible complexity to only a few select systems: (1) the bacterial flagellum; (2) the blood-clotting cascade; and (3) the immune system. Contrary to Professor Behe’s assertions with respect to these few biochemical systems among the myriad existing in nature, however, Dr. Miller presented evidence, based upon peer-reviewed studies, that they are not in fact irreducibly complex.
-"...proponents assert that they refuse to propose hypotheses on the designer’s identity, do not propose a mechanism, and the designer, he/she/it/they, has never been seen. … Professor Behe’s only response to these seemingly insurmountable points of disanalogy was that the inference still works in science fiction movies.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Behe
It was easy to debunk Behe b/c the science community and his university do not openly accept his views.

We will discuss the use of probability theory tomorrow.

David, most people truly interested in evolution and/or creationism do not post topics that are several years old. They have moved on to more recent issues and do not take to time to rehash the same old topics. This is how I know you just stumbled upon this issue. If you really want to get down and dirty join up at http://www.scienceforums.net/ or http://www.ethicalatheist.com/forum/index.php. You want a "rational" debate? Well come on down! I still find it funny that you're brave enough to claim that you can disprove evolution.

[Jaimecbr900]

I'm only critical of your religious posts b/c they are comical.

Glad you like them.

If you don't like what I post then don't read it.

Come up with something more original than that tired ass response.

I don't like what you post because you NEVER give anything else besides what little resides between your ears any validity, opportunity, or chance. You are by far the absolute most biased and closed minded individual on this entire site. Even totally opposing views have had very constructive albeit argumentative debates here, that is until you start to post. What happens then is that it turns debates into cluster fucks because you love to insert personal conjecture and biased propaganda that you google while you get your rocks off getting on people's nerves on purpose.

Can I be any more clear for you?

I encourage everyone to respond to my topics, EVEN someone like you. If you can dish it out then you SHOULD be able to take it.

Name one time I've never "took" what you're tried to shovel around?? Name it.

You have yet to answer a question I posed to you last year. It's not verbatim but close enough: if you and every Christian zealot deem science as inaccurate, why do you reap the rewards of it everyday?

For the exact same reason you're allowed to breathe the AIR that GOD gave you to breathe.

In your world, we take an aspirin for a headache we suddenly become defacto approvers of the big band theory. It figures, but you're so far off the mark it's not even worth the gum off the bottom of your school desk.

Just because someone uses scientific improvements doesn't automatically mean that they endorce science's idea of evolution. That makes no sense whatsoever. So does that mean that if you breathe the air that I believe wholeheartedly GOD made and provides for you that you suddenly believe God exists??? No, right? Then why would me taking advantage of scientific improvements make me any more an endorcer of the big bang theory? How do you tie both together?

I know it's an elementary question, but it serves my purpose. I'm willing to bet that if a family member were to become ill you wouldn't call your priest first. Im pretty sure you'd be headed to the ER. Why not just pray about it? Pray and hope that your loved one will pull through and forget about all the advances in medicine.

I've answered it before and I answered it again above. You just don't like the answer.

Just because I would look to science to mend a broken BODY does not have anything to do with that person's or his/her family's FAITH in God. Nothing at all. So in your thought process, if I go and get my broken arm casted up at the ER it automatically means that I don't believe in God??? How's that work again? I may pray for someone's speedy recovery. I may pray for someone's family to stay strong during a hard time in their life. That doesn't mean that I don't hope and also pray that the doctors and nurses who try and mend them also are successful. So your point is totally invalid and makes no sense. I see where you're going, but you just don't know how to get there.

I'll tell you what....I'll use the same logic right back on you. How come you rely so heavily on your tried and true "science", yet your "science" can't keep us from dying???? If it's sooooo perfectly right as you say it is and base your whole life on, why do people STILL die ON meds and while under Dr's care??? Furthermore, why do people die each and every day eventhough they were given a clean bill of health by DR's? One more since I'm on a roll.....why do people die every day while on PRESCRIBED MEDICINES that someone somewhere swore would prolong their life??? Answer those with science.

Oddly enough, religious nuts only seem to call the clergy when the patient is near death's door. People like you take comfort in the bosom of science when you need it most, but when it doesn't conform to your propaganda it's the red headed stepchild.

See, you are so twisted in trying to refute everything I say that you can't see the forest for the trees.

I'm not arguing against Science. I'm arguing against people that don't use common sense to figure out that there has to be something far greater than US that created, orchestrated, and planned ALL of us being here right now. Science has tried to COPY what has been CREATED before. It has only succeeded in COPYING what is already there. It has NEVER CREATED anything that comes remotely close to what real life creates every day. So for someone to sit there and pompously proclaim that "Science" is the root of humanity and thereby "Science" is how everything around us including humans was created doesn't make any sense to me. If that was so, how come "Science" can't create anything? You are depending your whole life upon something that continuously evolves into something else over time. The belief of God has been basically the same for millenia, yet you want to argue against it using theories that are continuously changing rationale??? Makes no sense to me.

Now, the statement is not just meant for Jaime, but for every Christian nut that assumes science is inherently evil.

As I said above, I don't know where you are getting that I think Science is evil. I don't. I think it is just a tool like every other tool we use to make our life here as comfortable as possible. Nothing at all wrong with it. The only problem I have is when people use "science" as their ONLY belief system, yet see NO flaws with it at all. THAT is my problem with you, NOT science. Science can prove lots of things. It has yet to disprove God though. Why is that? Because it can't. Science of today is obsolete tommorow by yet another "scientific" discovery that today we didn't think existed or was possible. How come "scientist" fall on their ass backwards saying something is dead on balls accurate today, yet tommorow come in to announce a great breakthrough that makes what was accurate yesterday not so accurate today???? This is the theory you want to base your life's belief system on? Fickle and often proving itself wrong.....that is what you base your life's beliefs on??? Good for you.

You may mock my belief system. You may not agree with it. You're also a fool if you think that there isn't another higher power that has orchestrated all of this, including mine and your bickering debates. You hang your hat on the nail of an aging mortar and pestle and I'll just hang mine on the nails of the cross. You choose what you want to believe in. That is exactly what God intended for each and every one of us.....for us to CHOOSE him or not. Each side has its rewards and punishments. Roll the dice the way YOU see fit.

Just some comments by the judge on Behe's testimony:

David's a big boy and he can respond to your comments himself, but I will say this:

A Judge? You're using a court ruling to back up your evolution belief???

Maybe I'll post up what my mechanic thinks.....maybe I'll quote my next door neighbor.....wait, I know.....I'll quote a bum off the corner who is preaching to me to get me to give him money.....

As if a JUDGE is some kind of authority on evolution or science or even religion.

Quote a scientist or a priest, but a judge????

Anyway, I'll let David respond to your reply, but I just had to comment. Carry on.

[Hulud]

dont want to interject but there are a few things that you said jaime that i would not have expected from you

I'll tell you what....I'll use the same logic right back on you. How come you rely so heavily on your tried and true "science", yet your "science" can't keep us from dying???? If it's sooooo perfectly right as you say it is and base your whole life on, why do people STILL die ON meds and while under Dr's care??? Furthermore, why do people die each and every day eventhough they were given a clean bill of health by DR's? One more since I'm on a roll.....why do people die every day while on PRESCRIBED MEDICINES that someone somewhere swore would prolong their life??? Answer those with science.

that right there is a stupid, stupid question. i guess i expected you not to make such ignorant statements, but o well. you sit there and ask that, yet you dont ask why god cant save peoples lives .

I'm not arguing against Science. I'm arguing against people that don't use common sense to figure out that there has to be something far greater than US that created, orchestrated, and planned ALL of us being here right now. Science has tried to COPY what has been CREATED before. It has only succeeded in COPYING what is already there. It has NEVER CREATED anything that comes remotely close to what real life creates every day. So for someone to sit there and pompously proclaim that "Science" is the root of humanity and thereby "Science" is how everything around us including humans was created doesn't make any sense to me. If that was so, how come "Science" can't create anything? You are depending your whole life upon something that continuously evolves into something else over time. The belief of God has been basically the same for millenia, yet you want to argue against it using theories that are continuously changing rationale??? Makes no sense to me.

So people dont have any common sense if they dont believe in your god? That just goes to show why organized religion is a joke. How are you going to sit there and say that someone claiming science is the root of life doesnt make sense to you, yet you WHOLEHEARTEDLY believe there is this god out there that put it all there? I mean if you didnt EVER go to church or ever hear the concept of a god you wouldnt even think there was a god. Someone planted that idea in your head at whatever age and you came to believe it, just as Cialis does with science. Until you both some riding bandwagons you wont see anyother possible way but your own.

So evolution is bad? Believing in something that ACTUALLY corrects its mistakes is a bad thing?

[Jaimecbr900]

dont want to interject but there are a few things that you said jaime that i would not have expected from you

Sorry to dissapoint.

that right there is a stupid, stupid question. i guess i expected you not to make such ignorant statements, but o well. you sit there and ask that, yet you dont ask why god cant save peoples lives .

#1. It is an analogy, so it is not meant to make factual sense just rhetorical.
#2. It is not ignorant to ask someone that bases his whole life around "science" and how much man is the top of the evolutionary chain due to it's high brain capacity why if "man" and his science is so dead on accurate to have solved life's one and only riddle yet it can't keep us from dying. In other words, if science is so evolutionized that it has proven the lack of existance of a higher being why is it that it still can't keep us from dying? God has a plan for that very riddle. Always has. Always was the same. Science in turn has changed it's answer 50 gazillion times. THAT was my point.

So people dont have any common sense if they dont believe in your god? That just goes to show why organized religion is a joke.

See, now I expected far more from YOU then.

I never said anyone that doesn't believe the same things I do have no common sense. Where did I say that? I said that not believing in a HIGHER POWER doesn't make sense to me and outlined the reasons why.

People will believe what they want to believe. Look at IA as an example. There are a lot of people that don't believe in God. That's fine. So when I say that it makes no common sense to not believe I am saying that I don't see the logic in thinking WE, humans, are all knowing and suddenly have solved the question of the existance of God, period. Be it Allah, Buddah, Jesus, or Jehovah. The point is that TO ME it is utterly ridiculous to think that I, let alone half the ying yangs on IA that still barely can tie their own shoes, have enough brain matter capacity to quantifiably prove the existance of God beyond any doubt. This is where ALL of us have to choose that proverbial fork in the road. Some choose the right, some choose the left. That is what the whole purpose in life really is, choosing the right path according to what YOU believe. If you believe that there is no God, then you choose one side of the road over the other. That's it. This is why I said what I said. Clear now?

How are you going to sit there and say that someone claiming science is the root of life doesnt make sense to you,

Because it doesn't.

yet you WHOLEHEARTEDLY believe there is this god out there that put it all there?

Because THAT is what makes sense to ME.

I mean if you didnt EVER go to church or ever hear the concept of a god you wouldnt even think there was a god. Someone planted that idea in your head at whatever age and you came to believe it, just as Cialis does with science.

Well, funny you use that example.

I have read many stories about missionaries that have traveled and lived in some of the most remote areas of the globe. Like you said, when they get there people have lots of questions about lots of things. When the missionaries relay their Biblical or religious ideas, often times these people have that Acme-light bulb going off over your head- epiphany. It suddenly all clicks and makes sense when before they couldn't make heads or tails about it.

I would imagine that happens in reverse too when someone decides to believe Science and Evolution over Creationism. But often times when we are researching for ourselves we find the answer that makes SENSE to US and then just call that OUR "fact" storing it up there in some filing cabinet in our heads. So just because you've not heard about Christianity doesn't necessarily mean you don't believe in a higher being, it may just be you haven't realized where to go look up the answer at.

Until you both some riding bandwagons you wont see anyother possible way but your own.

I think you left something out of that sentence, but I agree with you.

So evolution is bad? Believing in something that ACTUALLY corrects its mistakes is a bad thing?

Not necessarily, just the raw idea of everything on earth began from some single celled organism that was in some cespool of nothingness suddenly becoming a life. That part makes no sense.

Now, the fact that things adapt to their new environments in order to survive, that I believe. There can still be a master plan. There can still be a God overseeing things. There can still be a purpose to everything. That is strictly faith, and I think that's what you guys have problems with me on.

[Hulud]

Sorry to dissapoint.

you missed what i meant to say. i think i worded it wrong.

what i meant was i expected you to be better than that. better than the stupid comments that most people throw around.

Not necessarily, just the raw idea of everything on earth began from some single celled organism that was in some cespool of nothingness suddenly becoming a life. That part makes no sense.

and thats why you believe in god, because something that doesnt make sense to you now, you say god did it.

Now, the fact that things adapt to their new environments in order to survive, that I believe. There can still be a master plan. There can still be a God overseeing things. There can still be a purpose to everything. That is strictly faith, and I think that's what you guys have problems with me on.

thats the difference you believe there is a meaning to life, i dont

[Jaimecbr900]

thats the difference you believe there is a meaning to life, i dont

And because you don't believe is the reason you feel that way....